Sorry, I should have also given credit to Gov. Brown. His strong stance in favor of high speed rail is a profile in courage, considering the opposition that developed agains HSR, especially on the SF Peninsula.

We owe Gov. Brown a lot of credit, along with Pres. Obama.

We shall have a glorious HSR system, SF to LA, thanks to these two men.

Posted by More absurd than fiction
a resident of Addison School
on Jan 10, 2013 at 7:10 pm

The train in China flows from the Guangzhou area, with 40 million people, to the Beijing area, with 70 million people.

That population density seemed to warrant such a train. Perhaps some want and expect that density in the bay area as well, but most do not.

The train, with a distance perhaps half that of our planned California HSR, ended up with construction debt of between $600 billion and $700 billion, even though it was built with local enterprise. That debt is so large that it has negatively impacted the Chinese national economy.

It has been riddled with problems, including fatal accidents, high ticket costs, and political problems with shippers. The tickets cost upwards of 200, suggesting that California HSR tickets from SF to LA will cost roughly double that.

So sure, Obama and Brown are throwing unions a bone, at the cost and risk of negatively impacting the national economy and probably devastating the California economy, while furthering the shift of transportation technology strength from the US to China.

Posted by RJ
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Jan 10, 2013 at 7:48 pm

Try reading that again. "The train, with a distance perhaps half that of our planned California HSR, ended up with construction debt of between $600 billion and $700 billion"

China is spending $600 billion on HSR all over the country. Many, many lines.

"Completion of the Beijing-Guangzhou route  roughly 1,200 miles  is the latest sign that China has resumed rapid construction on one of the world's largest and most ambitious infrastructure projects, a network of four north-south routes and four east-west routes that span the country."

China: they get it done.

California? Too many whiners.

Some countries are moving forward into the 21st century. Some folks around here are more comfortable with their heads in sand.

Ina a couple decades, with our infrastructure crumbled, they'll pull their heads out of their.... and wonder: "whaaaa is happn'ing?"

I would like to suggest that Palo Alto city council drop its resistance to high speed rail. Most of the resisters are liberals, as am I, and they probably voted for Barack Obama and Jerry Brown, as did I. It is time to join the team for the future!

Why are there always complaints about debt? This country went into debt to win World War I and WWII. Was it worth it?

We need to spend what we need to spend to achieve the future.

Imagine HSR from SF to LA (possibly beyond), with a major station in Palo Alto, next to Stanford. Think about all the public transit possibilities and carbon reduction. Pres. Obama and Gov. Brown have been thinking about it, and good for them!

It is, finally, time for Palo Alto city council to wake up and smell the coffee. We need a strong endorsement of HSR from our city council. Elections have consequences, as the saying goes, and both Pres. Obama and Gov. Brown have won.

Posted by David Lieberman
a resident of Professorville
on Jan 11, 2013 at 3:44 pm

The referendum which authorized the issuing of bonds requires that once the system is complete there will be no ongoing operational subsidy. The economics have been reviewed over and over and the result is always the same; huge subsidies will be required.

So what will happen? After the system is built at a cost between 60 and 90 billion dollars, it will have to be shut down. We will have a nice 500 mile hiking trail.

And yes, I voted for Obama and for Brown. In this case they are just wrong.

That's a new one - let's equate WWI and WWII funding to HSR! Let's see, we had 2 wars where innocents were slaughtered by their oppressors. In the second war, we were attacked and our way of life and freedom was directly threatened. Oh yeah, and that Hitler guy.

No we shouldn't subsidize it. Charge the prices that will support the costs to run the darn thing. If you want it, you pay for it. Without subsidies HSR will come close to approaching a typical airline fare to SoCal.

"Without subsidies HSR will come close to approaching a typical airline fare to SoCal."

Your point? Airplanes create CO2 in our atmoshphere. HSR can be powered by solar and wind and hydro and nuclear electricity, all of them free of CO2 emissions.

We all need to contribute to the end of global warming. HSR is part of the mix. Palo Alto needs to sacrifice, in order to contribute. We are all in this together.

Our city council needs to recognize the reality. All of the 'Berlin Wall' nonsense needs to be put into the dustbin of history. Palo Alto needs to live up to our well deserved reputation of progressive politics. President Obama and Gov. Brown have shown the way. We need to follow them.

> In the second war, we were attacked and our way of life and freedom was directly threatened.

As it is now, with global warming. Palo Alto, and other SF peninsula cities need to understand that they must sacrifice, in order to contribute to the prevention of global warming.

We have truly amazing national and state leaership, yet we are left with local reactionaries, who want to demand their own selfish positions. At the same time, they claim to believe in the threat of global warming. How is this possible?

Is global warming real, or not? I, along with the vast majority of scientists, think it is. We must respond to this global threat by sacrficing our own selfish desires. HSR is one important resposne to global warming. It must be built.

Why are the SF peninsula cities trying to block it? Why is our city council, which supported HSR, initially, now locked into opposition? They need to follow the leadership from Pres. Obama and Gov. Brown.

@ Brock - you must be new to the party. Why do the Peninsula cities want to block it? Because it would run high speed trains through the heart of their towns. It would require expansion of the existing right of way. People would lose their homes due to the expansion.

The proposed solution would be at-grade or elevated - making a formidable industrial look in what are sleepy towns in most cases.

The HSR will not fund tunnels or trenches - which is what most Peninsula cities want.

I would have preferred to see the route to run up the 101 --- stops at SJC and SFO before SF. Easy access from the freeways. Take advantage of the already existing major/international transit hubs.

>Why do the Peninsula cities want to block it? Because it would run high speed trains through the heart of their towns. It would require expansion of the existing right of way. People would lose their homes due to the expansion.

Compared to the global warming threat, this is a small price to pay. Both Pres. Obama and Gov. Brown understnd this tradeoff. Why is it so hard for the SF peninisula to understand it?